Protestant Anti-Sacramentalism

[Matariel]

Given the huge implications of the Incarnation of Jesus, and that Catholicism (Including Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy) hold to sacramental theology and worship, and that even Old Testament worship and understanding was sacramental, why is it that most Protestants completely reject sacramental theology, worldview, and worship, and hold to a seemingly Gnostic view that spirit and matter are eternally divorced and that matter cannot convey grace? Or that physical places and objects cannot be “holy”?

Doesn’t this seem to break the continuity between Old and New Testaments?

And doesn’t this go against clear implications of the Incarnation, and also the testimony of the early Church?

 

[1ke]

Sacraments require priesthood.

The priesthood is your answer-- it’s not anti-sacramentalism, it’s anti-clericalism. That is the heart of the Reformation.

 

[Publisher]

Given the huge implications of the Incarnation of Jesus, and that Catholicism (Including Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy) hold to sacramental theology and worship, and that even Old Testament worship and understanding was sacramental, why is it that most Protestants completely reject sacramental theology, worldview, and worship, and hold to a seemingly Gnostic view that spirit and matter are eternally divorced and that matter cannot convey grace? Or that physical places and objects cannot be “holy”?

Doesn’t this seem to break the continuity between Old and New Testaments?

And doesn’t this go against clear implications of the Incarnation, and also the testimony of the early Church?

While I can’t speak for all Protestants, as a Friend we believe life itself is sacramental…the incarnation showed us that human life itself can become holy when infused with the Holy Spirit and God enteres our humanity.

In Christ He and He alone is the One who works within us…each act of kindness takes on sacramental meaning, every person wears the face of Christ as we become avenues of grace in our world.

Most Protestants do not “reject” sacramental understanding…but expand it significantly. No one can mediate grace to us but Christ…so no sacrificail priesthood is required…no one can act or perform a ritual on our behalf. The old sacrificial priesthood under the old covenant has been fulfilled in Christ. He split the veil between the holy of holies and opened the Way for each of us to enter into the Holy of Holies individually and corporately by making each of us priests and kings to approach Him without an immediary…God is now our Abba, Father, “Daddy”, the term underscores a new relationship of Parent and child as we partake of the divine nature and are adopted by Him as beloved children…children that do not require someone to act on their behalf that has been ritually prepared to do so…In Christ we have been “ritually cleansed” to apprach God with boldness of a beloved child to Loving Parent.

Each meal and act of kindness has sacramental meaning. Each kind word spoken in Love “confects” the sacrament of Life. Each time we move our hands to heal and help the Ritual Sign of our redemption is seen as we minister to one another as a Holy Nation, a Royal Priesthood of Believers.

No ritual or rite performed on our behalf can bring us into relationship with the Father…simply a sincere repentant heart and receiving His astounding grace and mercy as shown by Christ who imparts it to us without ritual or rite freely as we walk in newness of life as a New Creation…we live in escatological immediacy of a Present Christ who indwells us and lives among us…our Immanuel…God with Us.

 

[Matariel]

Sacraments require priesthood.

The priesthood is your answer-- it’s not anti-sacramentalism, it’s anti-clericalism. That is the heart of the Reformation.

Wow, I never thought of that. But I wonder if that is what Protestants would say…?

It is true that the Sacraments and sacramental worship are inexoribly tied to the priesthood. Alternately, the Priesthood is also a Sacrament (Ordination). interesting…

 

[JimG]

I think that rejection of the sacraments has been one of the basic principles of most forms of protestantism from the beginning. Even those who do accept sacraments often do not consider them as efficacious but merely symbolic. Yes, I do think that there is a built in tension between acceptance of the Incarnation and rejection of sacramentalism. There is also a certain tension between acceptance of humans as composed of body and soul and a rejection of sacramentalism. But that would be a long discussion.

 

[Matariel]

Publisher, I think you draw a false distinction about sacramental life, and I don’t think that you understand its full meaning for Catholics. There are seven Sacraments generally recognized by the Church, but…

One day, a student asked St. Augustine how many Sacraments there were.
“Well, there are hundreds upon thousands of Sacraments.” was his reply (paraphrase).

And this is true of sacramental life of Catholics. Mankind was actually the first Sacrament, because we were made in God’s image. A kiss is a kind od Sacrament. Crying is a kind of Sacrament. All of life is a Sacrament.

And I think that while what you say of Friends, or Quakers, is true, that they have a sacramental sense of some things, I disagree about most Protestants. I was raised Protestant (ex-Nazarene,ex-Wesleyan, ex-Independent) and can say that I never even concieved of life in any sacramental sense. I think this is true of most Protestants, Friends excepted.

 

[Matariel]

I think that rejection of the sacraments has been one of the basic principles of most forms of protestantism from the beginning. Even those who do accept sacraments often do not consider them as efficacious but merely symbolic.

Well, they cannot really be Sacraments if they are merely empty symbols, right?

 

[JimG]

Well, they cannot really be Sacraments if they are merely empty symbols, right?

That’s right; that’s why many denominations call them “ordinances.” At the root of anti-sacramentalism is a tendency to insist on a complete separation of the spiritual from the material. Things such as water and oil and bread and wine and the laying on of hands are (in this worldview) nice symbols only: God as pure spirit could not, would not, use mere matter to do anything efficacious spiritually. But then, that goes counter to the Incarnation itself, wherein God uses mere matter to actually become man.

 

[Matariel]

That’s right; that’s why many denominations call them “ordinances.” At the root of anti-sacramentalism is a tendency to insist on a complete separation of the spiritual from the material. Things such as water and oil and bread and wine and the laying on of hands are (in this worldview) nice symbols only: God as pure spirit could not, would not, use mere matter to do anything efficacious spiritually. But then, that goes counter to the Incarnation itself, wherein God uses mere matter to actually become man.

Exactly. That’s a good point… I

wish more Protestants would respond to this. I’d like to hear their views.

 

[1ke]

Wow, I never thought of that. But I wonder if that is what Protestants would say…?

It is true that the Sacraments and sacramental worship are inexoribly tied to the priesthood. Alternately, the Priesthood is also a Sacrament (Ordination). interesting…

Study up on Luther. This was Luther’s central issue.

And, it then was accelerated and exacerbated by the secular ruler’s grab for money and power. No priests, no Bishops, no Pope = lots of church property, wealth, and taxes going into the king’s coffers.

 

[JonNC]

Given the huge implications of the Incarnation of Jesus, and that Catholicism (Including Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy) hold to sacramental theology and worship, and that even Old Testament worship and understanding was sacramental, why is it that most Protestants completely reject sacramental theology, worldview, and worship, and hold to a seemingly Gnostic view that spirit and matter are eternally divorced and that matter cannot convey grace? Or that physical places and objects cannot be “holy”?

Doesn’t this seem to break the continuity between Old and New Testaments?

And doesn’t this go against clear implications of the Incarnation, and also the testimony of the early Church?

Lutherans also recognize the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist. “the priesthood of believers” does not eliminate the need for a regularly called and ordained clergy (yes, I know the Catholic Church does not recognize our clergy).
Incidentally, Baptism does not “require” a priest.

Jon

 

[Publisher]

Publisher, I think you draw a false distinction about sacramental life, and I don’t think that you understand its full meaning for Catholics. There are seven Sacraments generally recognized by the Church, but…

One day, a student asked St. Augustine how many Sacraments there were.
“Well, there are hundreds upon thousands of Sacraments.” was his reply (paraphrase).

And this is true of sacramental life of Catholics. Mankind was actually the first Sacrament, because we were made in God’s image. A kiss is a kind od Sacrament. Crying is a kind of Sacrament. All of life is a Sacrament.

And I think that while what you say of Friends, or Quakers, is true, that they have a sacramental sense of some things, I disagree about most Protestants. I was raised Protestant (ex-Nazarene,ex-Wesleyan, ex-Independent) and can say that I never even concieved of life in any sacramental sense. I think this is true of most Protestants, Friends excepted.

Since I can’t answer for others I have only answered for me and what I “think” is the underlying impetus…the sacramental aspect of life…the infusing with the Eternal and Divine is too many to only number 7…every aspect takes on a life God Breathed and God Ordered and God Infused. It’s not only 7 but 70 x 7…I was not seeking to draw any “false distinction” life in all it’s trials and pain and glory and love IS in every way sacramental with every nuance the word entails…holy, complete and ongoing…I do not reject sacraments…I simply reject the notion that “outward forms” or “ceremonies” make a sacrament but a kind word or deed in His name does not.

Augustine would have been a good Friend. Perhpaps among the Nazarenes and Weslyans you missed an aspect of the sacramental life that is implicit in the belief of sanctification and very much part of much of Protestant theology…just not always touched on in the pulpit…with each of us acting a priest before God it is each of our responsibility to live a sacramental life and infuse each moment with the Divine…just a thought.

 

[Matariel]

Lutherans also recognize the sacraments of Baptism and the Eucharist…Incidentally, Baptism does not “require” a priest.

Jon

This is true. The Church recognizes that God makes this Sacrament as accessible as possible, and, by virtue of our common baptism, Catholics and Protestants alike are Christians. Baptism is the Universal Sacrament.

 

[ckempston]

Sacraments require priesthood.

The priesthood is your answer-- it’s not anti-sacramentalism, it’s anti-clericalism. That is the heart of the Reformation.

All Christians are priests (little “p”).

But, as for the question, I guess I believe in two sacraments at a minimum: baptism, and confession (albeit, confession to another Christian and not a Priest).

 

[1ke]

All Christians are priests (little “p”).

Of course they are. That is not at issue.

 

[mario_grgic]

Who cares what Protestants think? These are the people who have rejected Christ’s full message and selected a few things that suit them to believe. They have rejected his holy Church as well.

The Christ Protestants believe in is not the same Christ that Catholics believe in. Apparently their Christ did, said and meant completely different things. And that would make him anti-christ (one of many).

You can’t go on concerning yourself with beliefs of others. Muslims say that Christ was not God, nor died on the cross, and of course not resurrected at all. So what.

All you can do is share your faith for those who search…

 

[Publisher]

Who cares what Protestants think? These are the people who have rejected Christ’s full message and selected a few things that suit them to believe. They have rejected his holy Church as well.

The Christ Protestants believe in is not the same Christ that Catholics believe in. Apparently their Christ did, said and meant completely different things. And that would make him anti-christ (one of many).

You can’t go on concerning yourself with beliefs of others. Muslims say that Christ was not God, nor died on the cross, and of course not resurrected at all. So what.

All you can do is share your faith for those who search…

Perhaps you should petition CAF to close down the “Non-Catholic Religions” forum…then we can nip the whole discussion in the bud.

What say you other Catholics on the board. Do you agree with this poster? Will you speak up in support of those of us “separated brethren”?

I’d love to hear what you have to say on the issue of one of your own who has written so forcefully. We get quite a bit of response when a Protestant minister or teacher speaks something equally “anit-Catholic”…how do you respond to something like this?

 

[ckempston]

Of course they are. That is not at issue.

Just an observation, though I suppose a point could be made of that. If all Christians are priests, then what “sacraments” do all Christians have the ability to administer?

 

[Matariel]

All Christians are priests (little “p”).

This is true; it is the priesthood of all believers. But right now we are talking about the clerical priesthood, or the presbytery.

By the way, the word “priest” is a contraction of the word “presbyter”.

But, as for the question, I guess I believe in two sacraments at a minimum: baptism, and confession (albeit, confession to another Christian and not a Priest).

So, how do you reconcile that to John 20:23, Matt. 16, and James 5:14-15? It clearly states that the first bishops, and also the presbytery, were the norm in sacramental confession. The early Church Fathers also held this view, although it had not been established whether it was general or auricular confession.

 

[ibkc]

What say you other Catholics on the board. Do you agree with this poster? Will you speak up in support of those of us “separated brethren”?

I’d love to hear what you have to say on the issue of one of your own who has written so forcefully. We get quite a bit of response when a Protestant minister or teacher speaks something equally “anit-Catholic”…how do you respond to something like this?

I don’t know why you feel you have to demand Catholics to speak up. The assertion made that Protestants are worshiping a different Christ is so ludicrous that it barely merits any response at all. Of course Protestants and Catholics follow the same Christ. The understanding of the bare-bones basics of Christ’s life and work are common to all Christians, regardless of differences of interpretation of the finer details.